Given GM's capacity to produce 'vapour ware' it seems fitting they're partnering with Clairvoyant...

And to think that the eco-chic get excited when Toyota puts a little bitty solar panel on top of a Prius. I guess the US auto makers aren't entirely obsessed with destroying the planet with their SUV's, now are they?

What I want to know is what are those white boxes between the solar panels, and if they are A/C units, why aren't the solar panels shading them?

Awesome! Yet people still say GM is doing nothing for the enviroment. :)

Oooo.. Solar. Very interesting. Not that I haven't seen it before. But I think that it's good people start moving to cleaner resources

doesn't make up for killing the EV-1

Cool. Now this is an intelligent move for any company that can afford the initial investment. I assume the 12MW is the peak power output the system can provide, because if that were the average power produced over the course of a 24 hour period it would imply that the buildings covered about 12 acres. I know when talking about solar systems it is customary to report peak output, but I find average output to be a far more enlightening number.

Remember, over a petawatt (average, not peak) of solar power lands on the world's buildings. With available 20% efficient PV, that gives us 13 times as much energy (in the form of electricity) as the primary energy the world currently consumes. If we used as much as we wanted and stored the rest in the form of, for example, hydrogen (from electrolysis of water) or another compound that can later be transported and then burned or reacted to release energy, we could solve our dirty grid and transportation GHG problems with one technology that already exists, despite the inefficiencies inherent in converting from electricity to fuel and back.

To make it happen, we need (at minimum) to do the following: 1) increase manufacturing capacity by several orders of magnitude. 2) lower panel costs and increase efficiencies, anything that reduces the payback period. 3) Encourage/promote adoption and prevent power companies/neighbors/etc. from preventing installations. 4) once systems become common, encourage the use of home fuel cells to store energy for night use rather than taking advantage of net metering laws. 5) as systems become even more common, and power companies (perhaps) don't need to supply energy at all (since it can all come from rooftop solar and various wind turbines), these power companies can change their business model and continue making money. They need to 6) get into the business of converting energy to fuels (and back, when needed). Oil companies should do the same. Manufacturing synthetic fuels that can be easily used in remote locations, on the move, or when the sun isn't shining and the wind isn't blowing will be essential to any economy based on renewable energy sources.

That is, at least, unless some dramatic and totally unforeseen advance in superconductivity allows us to construct a global grid for sending power from the other side of the world for use at night time, and some amazing new battery allows EV to get a long enough range that no one will need to refuel en route to anywhere. But I don't hold my breath for miracles.

And synthetic fuels, unlike fossil fuels, can easily be made carbon neutral by manufacturing them either without carbon (hydrogen is an example) or using atmospheric CO2 as a carbon source. Keep in mind also that synthetic fuel production will require large amounts of water as a hydrogen source, so desalination will need to be increased dramatically. We'll probably need to do that to offset global warming-induced droughts anyway, though.

Can it be done? Technologically, yes. Will it take centuries? No, we could have solar powering all of our needs within a couple of decades, and supply would continue to grow very quickly after that. Will it take massive amounts of land? No, existing rooftops are more than sufficient. Will it kill the economy? No, it would be the greatest economic payoff in history and could lift hundreds of millions out of poverty. Will we do it? I have no idea. Can we muster the political will? Can we convince the people that the plan will work? Is there a leader who will undertake such a project?

I say we don't take the chance. Make any one renewable energy source cheaper on a per-kWh basis (including the costs of storage/time-shifting of energy use) than coal, and our work is done. We may end up using a lot of (currently useless) desert or very windy land for energy production instead of only rooftops, but the other important questions would all take care of themselves.

That's nice and all, but they still don't make a car that this Treehugger would want to buy. Isn't that the point of a car company?

Toyota puts a few square feet of solar panels on a not-even-confirmed solar-powered Prius, and GM puts millions on the roof of an assembly plant in a sunny climate. Which is more intelligent?

I am not biased towards either company. When I buy a vehicle my purchase will be based on the vehicle, not on stereotypes of its manufacturer. Anybody reading this is free to come to their own conclusions after reviewing the possibility that GM may be getting treated a little unfairly when it comes to being environmentally-friendly.

This has to be the way forward. Why go to the trouble of building huge plants that cost a fortune when you can just place solar panels on existing roof-tops? Hardly rocket science is it? All new builds should have solar panels built into them!